Outside Directors and CEO Selection
Kenneth A. Borokhovich, Robert Parrino, and Teresa Trapani
This paper documents a strong positive relation between the percentage of
outside directors and the frequency of outside CEO succession. The
likelihood that an executive from outside the firm is appointed CEO
increases monotonically with the percentage of outside directors. This
monotonic relation is observed for both voluntary and forced departures.
Evidence from stock returns around succession announcements indicates
that, on average, shareholders benefit from outside appointments, but are
harmed when an insider replaces a fired CEO.
Measuring Rents and Interest Rate Risk in Imperfect
Financial Markets: The Case of Retail Bank Deposits
David E. Hutchison and George G. Pennacchi
Traditional measures of interest rate risk assume that prices of financial
assets and liabilities are set in perfectly competitive markets. However,
evidence suggests that many retail financial markets do not follow the
competitive paradigm. In this paper we employ a general contingent claims
framework to value rents earned by banks in demandable retail deposit
markets. Our analysis provides a natural and economically meaningful
measure of interest rate risk for these imperfectly competitive markets.
Using monthly survey data on NOW accounts and MMDAs, we estimate the value
of retail deposit rents and deposit durations for over 200 commercial
banks.
What Do Stock Splits Really Signal?
David L. Ikenberry, Graeme Rankine, and Earl K. Stice
We observe significant post-split excess returns of 7.93% in the first
year and 12.15% in the first three years for a sample of 1,275 two-for-one
stock splits. These excess returns follow an announcement return of 3.38%,
indicating that the market underreacts to split announcements. The
evidence suggests that splits realign prices to a lower trading range, but
managers self-select by conditioning the decision to split on expected
future performance. Pre-split runup and post-split excess return are
inversely related, indicating that our results are not caused by
momentum.
The Impact of Industry Classifications On Financial
Research
Kathleen M. Kahle and Ralph A. Walkling
Using approximately 10,000 firms jointly covered by Compustat and CRSP
from 1974-1993, we find substantial differences in the SIC codes
designated by the two databases. Over 36% of the classifications disagree
at the two-digit level and nearly 80% disagree at the four-digit level.
We examine the impact of these differences upon financial research in
several ways. First, we show that the classification of utilities,
financial firms, and conglomerate acquisitions are affected by the choice
of CRSP versus Compustat SIC codes. Second, we show that industry
classification matters in financial research by illustrating that size and
industry matched comparisons are more powerful than pure size matches.
Third, we test the specification and power of Compustat versus CRSP
classifications by simulating a typical financial experiment in which
sample firms are matched to control firms by industry. We find that: (1)
Compustat matched samples are more powerful than CRSP matched samples in
detecting abnormal performance, (2) non-parametric tests outperform
parametric tests, and (3) four-digit SIC code matches are more powerful
than two-digit SIC code matches. These results are robust to the
inclusion or exclusion of extreme values, and hold for both NYSE/AMEX and
Nasadaq firms.
Evidence on Corporate Hedging Policy
Shehzad L. Mian
This paper provides empirical evidence on the determinants of corporate
hedging decision. The paper examines the evidence in light of currently
mandated financial reporting requirements, in particular the constraints
placed on anticipatory hedging. Data on hedging are obtained from 1992
annual reports for a sample of 3,022 firms. Out of the 771 firms
classified as hedgers, 543 firms disclose information in their annual
reports on their hedging activities; the remaining 228 firms report use of
derivatives but no information on hedging activities. Based on the
evidence, I draw the following conclusions with respect to the models of
hedging: (a) evidence is inconsistent with financial distress cost
models, (b) evidence is mixed with respect to contracting cost, capital
market imperfections, and tax-based models, and (c) evidence uniformly
supports the hypothesis that hedging activities exhibit economies of
scale.